It is in the above-mentioned scene that we establish that Shylock is cast as the ‘other’, the non-dominant party within the play. This is something that does not change from the original text to the film appropriation. However, in the original Shakespearean works where mockery of Shylock was found humorous, Radford encourages empathy with the character of Shylock. While in the past, viewers found these ‘comedic’ elements a delight, in today’s time, when taking into account the history of Jewish people, viewers have a different response to the scenes within Merchant of Venice. Michael Radford is clearly aware of this altered perception and shows this through the way the scenes are carried out. The film varies from the original text, not only because it is through camera, but also in the way it is presented to the audience. When Antonio spits on Shylock, the music, camera and facial expressions combine to cast Antonio as the antagonist as opposed to Shylock. This is because modern society has a different perception of Value to the past and we now hold all races in equal esteem (or at least attempt to).
“We cannot doubt that Shylock must be condemned. However lively Shylock’s dialogue may be, however plausibly and passionately he presents his case, however cruelly the lovers treat him, he must still be defeated, because he is an enemy to love’s wealth and its free, joyful and continual giving.” This is an extract from the ‘Re-reading of The Merchant of Venice’ by Kiernan Ryan. This stereotypical outlook of the ‘other’ is applicable not only to Shylock, as the ‘pitiable but essentially evil Jew’ but to all races classed as the ‘other’. In Michael Radford’s appropriation of Merchant of Venice, he uses the aforementioned film techniques as well adaptations in the way dialogue is spoken to present the injustice presented to the ‘other’ a.k.a the minority or subdominant party. This is reinforced when neither the term Christian or Jew is mentioned in the scene. Therefore showing that it is in reference to all races or groups cast as the ‘other’ as well as Shylock in representation of all Jewish people.
Another notion explored in regards to Value and Culture in the appropriation of Merchant of Venice is the social hierarchy. In the original text it is clear that Jewish people (as represented by Shylock) are of a lower status to that of Christians or ‘white society’. In the film adaptation, Radford once again protests this with the use of melancholic music when Shylock is subject to injustice or ridicule. This is teamed with clever camera angles as when Shylock is in a subservient position, the camera shot makes him seem elevated even though he may be kneeling or have bowed his head. This again highlights the different social perspectives and values of modern society in contrast with that of the past. It shows that we no longer find amusement in the belittling of the ‘inferior’ as some were once dubbed. Society has learnt to accept differences and has worked on limiting the out-casting of ‘unaccepted’ races and/or other subdominant parties.
“In responding to the play, we should not suppress the awareness we ought to have of ‘the holocaust and the history of European Jewry in this Century. Nor should we resist the change in the angle of reception which such a consciousness creates.” Another extract from Kiernan Ryan’s ‘Re-reading The Merchant of Venice’, which reinforces the adaptations made from the original text to Radford’s film appropriation. It shows that Radford was right in his choice when, although still portraying Shylock as the antagonist that Shakespeare made him to be, uses his film to express how wrongly Shylock is treated and the inhumanity of it all. Michael Radford clearly took into account the history of Jewish people when creating his appropriation for Merchant of Venice and the presentation of Shylock’s character is a reflection of that.
A major notion that is extensively explored in Radford’s film adaptation of Merchant of Venice is anti-Semitism, or rather a protest against it. Although the aforementioned notions all play a role in this aspect, it is much larger than that. Anti-Semitism is a theme that is continual and visible throughout Merchant of Venice, the original play, and is used as a major comedic element as well as the foundation of the play itself. In spite of Shakespeare’s initial intention, in which he did not predict the oncoming horror that would befall the Jews, Michael Radford adapts the themes in Merchant of Venice to reflect his feelings toward the treatment of the ‘antagonist’ from the original works. Shylock’s dialogue, as well as that of his prosecutors, in the play is meant to be said with an air of humour, despite the cruelty of the actual words themselves. Instead Radford opts to have the dialogue said with dramatic flair with a touch of sadness that is actually befitting of the words being spoken. This conveys the harshness of anti-Semitism and clearly displays Radford’s negative attitude towards it. The film appropriation of Merchant of Venice is more aligned with the side of the Jewish Shylock as opposed to the Central protagonists ‘the Lovers’ and Antonio. It switches the roles of protagonist and antagonist without directly diverting from the original plot line. “With this speech there erupts into the play an irresistible egalitarian attitude, whose basis in the shared faculties and needs of our physical nature indicts all forms of inhuman discrimination. The speech provokes a sharp shift of emotional allegiance, from which our perception of the Christian protagonist never recovers. Through Shylock, The Merchant of Venice proceeds to broach a perspective which cracks the received readings wide open and transfigures our understanding of the play.” This extract, once again from ‘Re-reading The Merchant of Venice’ by Keirnan Ryan, is the perfect example of how Michael Radford’s appropriation displayed Shakespeare’s characters and how they differed from the original text. The speech that is being referred to in the quote is when Shylock is pleading the humanity of Jews and how they do not differ from other humans, or as a result, the domineering ‘white society’. While in the play, this may cause the audience to sympathise or pity Shylock for a few moments, ultimately they side with the ruling-class Christians as they triumph over Shylock. In the film appropriation, however, we as responders are urged to side with Shylock, not only because our own knowledge of Jewish history leads us to, but also because of the way he is portrayed and how the injustices he is subject to come to light.
With that said, it is ultimately the portrayal of Shylock’s character that holds the differing notions in the Film appropriation from the original text. Though the essence of The Merchant of Venice remains the same, the perception the viewers have of the story within it is altered. It is the way Michael Radford explores the notions of Value and Culture within Shakespeare’s original works that allows this altered perception to shine through. It is also this change in portrayal, along with the knowledge and acceptance of Jewish history that ultimately changes the genre of The Merchant of Venice from comedy to tragedy.
